Using ESTA with a past conviction

[biologist]

Hi, I've got a past conviction from seven years ago which is now "spent" under UK law but not US law. It was nothing too serious(simple possession of class A-cocaine) and only received a small fine for I understand that any arrests, convictions etc have to be revealed to the US. I've been searching high and low to try and uncover some info on this. People have said "yes" you shoud declare but others' have said just forget about it and tick NO on the form. I'm an honest person so I'd like to think but I've been worried sick about having to go and explain myself at the embassy. Yesterday I filled in the ESTA form and I was granted authorisation to travel to the states. Surely if they knew I wasn't eligable to travel under the VWP then they'd have told me not to go instead of basically saying "yes come but we will just turn you back when you land". Seems pointless and a waste of time in my eyes. What I want to know is if the US have full access to the police national computor and the UK fingerprint database? I don't think for one second that they have instant access to this at all. Takes weeks to get a CRB check in the UK, plus they need your signature on any CRB request form. I'd like to think that they had a database of potential threats, dangerous people, human/drug traffickers and terrorists etc. Because I'm decent and like to do the right thing I'm just thinking of going to London to the get the VISA. One more thing, when they do take your prints at the airport I've been told it's just to get prints of all entrants just incase they commit crime in the US, which would make sense. I know lying on the ESTA is wrong in itself but I've been that stressed that I thought f**k it I need to know what the response would be. Any thoughts or info on this would be great. Many thanks.

[VHG]

>What I want to know is if the US have full access to
>the police national computor and the UK fingerprint
>database?

Do you really think this is likely?

Just igonre your past crime and visit the USA as though it never happened.

If you admit it, and go to the embassy, and they say no, then you will never get in.

(I must admit, I quite like to see people who have committed past crimes, particulalry related to drugs, suffering some sort of "penalty" later in life for doing so, but in your case it was a long time ago and I think you have served your "sentence".)

[jno]

agree with VHG: just go with your Esta. They don't have access to UK records (except for bigtime terrorists) - the fingerprinting is just for their own purposes, so they can count you in and count you out again. Go and enjoy yourself.

[dzug]

If you go to the Embassy to apply for a visa it''s by no means certain you will get it. 'Nothing too serious' is not a criterion by which, at least initially, the US judge it. It's a crime of 'moral turpitude' and as such automatically debars you from entering the USA under the VWP and is sufficient grounds to refuse you a visa.

Now there is a thing called 'waiver of ineligibility' for a visa which they will apply for on your behalf if they think that the crime is sufficiently minor and/or sufficiently long ago to be overlooked. I don't know if seven years ago is long enough, and the only way you will find out is to apply for the visa.

Or as others have said, pretend it never happened. They don't have direct access to any UK police records and the only way they are going to know is if you 'fess up when you get there. You WILL get deported if you do - they don't have that kind of discretion at the border.

[max12]

biologist, when are you thinking of going to the US? Could you let us know how it all works out if you do go? This question comes up quite a bit so I'm sure you'll be of help to others. Thanks.

[biologist]

Hi, I'm not thinking of going for a few months yet but I'll definatly feed back what happens. It seems like no one is certain whether the US port of entry have access to the police national computer. I do doubt this very much unless it's a watch list of certain people. My ESTA says "travel authorised" so I'm just going to assume they've done all the checks that they can do, and from a logical point of view it would make more sense to tell me not to board the plane in the first place rather than make a wasted journey.

[max12]

Thanks, that'd be great if you can let us know. I think you're right about the port of entry, they probably do look at a watch list of drug/people traffickers, etc. I think the ESTA checks for people who are inelligible due to things like visa issues - already refused one or overstayed in the past, for example. Also, no it wouldn't make any sense to authorise your travel only to deny you - it must be a real pain in the arse for them when they do have to send people back. It'd be much simpler for all concerned to just tell you to get a visa from London.

[DD1820]

I know this is sometime ago! But I was wondering how you got on?

[123-wldpc]

Hi! I'm also wondering how you got on. I've been checking out some YouTube videos on customs in Australia, Canada, U.S. and U.K. It's crazy how much power those officials wield. They can go through your wallet, laptop and phones. Seems like they've got a bit of access to each others databases.